Interesting and utterly bizarre story about the network of influence between a variety of scumbags like Farage, Assange, Bannon, Putin, ....

This is a power network that involves Wikileaks and Farage, and Cambridge Analytica and Farage, and Robert Mercer and Farage. Steve Bannon, former vice president of Cambridge Analytica, and Farage. It’s Nigel Farage and Brexit and Trump and Cambridge Analytica and Wikileaks… and, if the Senate intelligence committee and the House intelligence committee and the FBI are on to anything at all, somewhere in the middle of all that, Russia.

Interesting and utterly bizarre story about the network of influence between a variety of scumbags like Farage, Assange, Bannon, Putin, ....

This is a power network that involves Wikileaks and Farage, and Cambridge Analytica and Farage, and Robert Mercer and Farage. Steve Bannon, former vice president of Cambridge Analytica, and Farage. It’s Nigel Farage and Brexit and Trump and Cambridge Analytica and Wikileaks… and, if the Senate intelligence committee and the House intelligence committee and the FBI are on to anything at all, somewhere in the middle of all that, Russia.

Interesting I grant you but, Christ, what a badly written article! Who is this ghastly woman? She cannot write a grammatical sentence. Some of this is just trying scratch Guardian readers' prejudices, e.g. the irrelevant inclusion of the founder of Cambridge Analytica having apparently been to Eton - so effing what? And then lists of trigger words like "power" and "patronage" and "spider's webs", without actually delineating anything very concrete.

I think I'll wait and see whether any of this makes the daily press rather than just the leftie Sundays.

Interesting I grant you but, Christ, what a badly written article! Who is this ghastly woman? She cannot write a grammatical sentence. Some of this is just trying scratch Guardian readers' prejudices, e.g. the irrelevant inclusion of the founder of Cambridge Analytica having apparently been to Eton - so effing what? And then lists of trigger words like "power" and "patronage" and "spider's webs", without actually delineating anything very concrete.

I tend to agree about the implications of the significance of some the meetings.

For example, this article (about the Trump-Russia-Clintion farrago) seems pretty balanced and confirms that Cambridge Analytics contacted Assange but he refused to help them (not surprisingly - both because he is an arrogant tool and because he doesn't like the uSA).https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/27...idge-analytica

Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore

Interesting I grant you but, Christ, what a badly written article! Who is this ghastly woman? She cannot write a grammatical sentence. Some of this is just trying scratch Guardian readers' prejudices, e.g. the irrelevant inclusion of the founder of Cambridge Analytica having apparently been to Eton - so effing what? And then lists of trigger words like "power" and "patronage" and "spider's webs", without actually delineating anything very concrete.

I tend to agree about the implications of the significance of some the meetings.

For example, this article (about the Trump-Russia-Clintion farrago) seems pretty balanced and confirms that Cambridge Analytics contacted Assange but he refused to help them (not surprisingly - both because he is an arrogant tool and because he doesn't like the uSA).https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/27...idge-analytica

Yup that seems a far better written and more objective analysis. I don't see myself any smoking gun yet, but if Papadopoulos has turned King's Evidence (or, ironically, POTUS's evidence, haha) I suppose more may come out. Manafort looks as if he could do time, but not for anything he did while working for The Chump.

P.S. I find it depressing that even formerly illustrious papers such as the Grauniad are now indulging in echo-chamber journalism. That article was dreadful. If you ever look at the Torygraph it is similarly ghastly - full of Brexsh1t obsession and climate change denial. Even the weeklies, the Spectator and the New Stoadsperson, are finding it harder to include material that is not polemic for massaging the prejudices of their readership.

My dear fellow ox, I think you misunderstand, we "Remoaners", as you so charmingly like to characterise us wish only the best for our country and any good news at the moment is more than welcome, please don't be under some illusion that we wish our country to fail when we choose to point out the negative effects of the referendum decision. We just want others to fully understand what is occurring, we all have the right to be as informed as possible about the future & fate of our country otherwise we would all be rather ill-equipped to fully exercise our democratic rights & responsibilities.

Given that we now have wage growth reduced by 75% from 2015 levels, have slumped economically to become one of the slowest growing economies in the entire European Union, now have a housing market which appears to be in freefall across whole swathes of our country, combining with inflation rate rises & personal debt levels reaching unsustainable levels all now threatening the possibility of negative equity & even mass repossessions, our NHS suffering the double whammy of both a funding & recruitment crisis, 40,000 nursing vacancies alone are still unfilled, we have a crime rate that has sky rocked perhaps most disturbingly in the rate of increase for crimes of violence & hate crimes, we all still living with uncertainty especially our businesses that are finding it particularly difficult to plan for the future, our currency continues to underperforming pre-referendum levels by a considerable margin, all in spite of the massive £250 billion in economic stimulus by the BoE Governor & indeed the further £150 billion in extra bank lending to prop up the housing market. So I say to you ox, any good news you can bring to us given the current situation is most welcome indeed!

Given that we now have wage growth reduced by 75% from 2015 levels, have slumped economically to become one of the slowest growing economies in the entire European Union

In a period when the minimum wage is becoming the living wage, there are always people who will complain. People today are the wealthiest in my memory. Nobody starves. Just about everybody is well dressed, own several cars per household, take foreign holidays.
We are not one of the slowest growing economies if you factor out tiny states like Malta and Cyprus who are doing well. We are close to the average, and above Germany, France and Italy to name but a few.

now have a housing market which appears to be in freefall across whole swathes of our country, combining with inflation rate rises & personal debt levels reaching unsustainable levels all now threatening the possibility of negative equity & even mass repossessions,

Housing is always a complex issue. When it overheats it's likely to fall and be more affordable. One problem is the amount of housing stock now in private landlord ownership. Everywhere I look there are new homes being built, but all too often they end up in the hands of buy to let landlords and foreign speculators.
There was far more negative equity and repossessions in the early 1990's.

our NHS suffering the double whammy of both a funding & recruitment crisis, 40,000 nursing vacancies alone are still unfilled,

I'm not clear what that has to do with Brexit, which only started last year. As long as I can remember the NHS has been in crisis, certainly going back to Thatcher. The mistake has been relying on agency and foreign staff.

we have a crime rate that has sky rocked perhaps most disturbingly in the rate of increase for crimes of violence & hate crimes,

It would be more disturbing if you had mentioned murder and armed robbery which is still relatively low.

we all still living with uncertainty especially our businesses that are finding it particularly difficult to plan for the future, our currency continues to underperforming pre-referendum levels by a considerable margin, all in spite of the massive £250 billion in economic stimulus by the BoE Governor & indeed the further £150 billion in extra bank lending to prop up the housing market. So I say to you ox, any good news you can bring to us given the current situation is most welcome indeed!

Can you tell me when we ever lived in an age of certainty?
The currency has been improving and is expected to recover more in 2018.
There is hardly ever good news in the economy, and again it has been like that ever since I can remember.

Nearly forgot, you haven't mentioned the crisis at The Science Forum.
Now, that I do blame on Brexit.

In a period when the minimum wage is becoming the living wage, there are always people who will complain. People today are the wealthiest in my memory. Nobody starves. Just about everybody is well dressed, own several cars per household, take foreign holidays.

My dear chap please tell me you are joking, that you don't actually believe this, we are now living in age where fully a third of the adult population don't even have a hundred pounds in their bank accounts, where millions are in rent arrears having had their welfare cut & where food banks have become ubiquitous, indeed never have the most vulnerable ever been quite so vulnerable!

Responsibility for the social, financial & disparity issues which now plague our nation cannot be laid entirely at door of the referendum, on this we may agree, however with the looming spectre of Brexit there is now an entirely new level of uncertainty hanging over all our heads, with little to go on perhaps our only indication of the storm of chaos threatening to engulf us all, the onset of rapid economic decline in wake of the referendum decision (despite huge economic stimulus) & the warnings from almost every major organisation about negative effects that would ensue.

With European Union membership, for many years now we've been privileged to enjoy harmonisation of standards, rules & regulations, where for the most part borders & nationality have been made irrelevant, where we've been free to plan & dream our futures no matter where our hearts would take us, our companies free to trade without restriction with international supply chains that were no more complicated than having factories next door, cooperation between governments with international projects, pooled resources, collective successes & benefits, new levels of liberty, millions removed from poverty, growth & social development levels simply unachievable for countries in isolation. So much at stake, at risk, all that may be lost - yet now is the calm before the coming storm, for now, we may not know what ill winds will blow.

It will be very funny to watch the squirming and prevarication from the Brexshitters over Northern Ireland, now that the EU has thrown down the gauntlet by pointing out the obvious, namely that the only way to avoid razor wire right across Ireland is to have the Customs Union and Single market boundary at the Irish sea ports , North and South. In other words, N Ireland has to be semi-detached from the UK so that it can, uniquely, stay in both Customs Union and Single Market.

The Brexshitters and the Daioupeaigh will hate this, but it seems to be the only secure way to control the movement of people and goods in both directions, to the satisfaction of both the UK and the EU. I have yet to read of ANY other proposal for solving this problem if the UK leaves the Customs Union or the Single Market. It seems to me high time the Rees-Moggs, the Bozos, the Goves and the Iain Dumcunt-Shits were forced to explain how they propose to deal with this issue in the no-deal situation that they claim would be perfectly fine.

At all events the UK now has 2 weeks to answer this question, if they want trade talks to start before the end of the year, which is when the banks will otherwise start moving people out of London.

Whatever solution is found for the border situation the Brexiteers will try and spin it as some kind of success or victory, this has constantly been their saving grace, they control the narrative. No matter how bad things are going they are repeatedly given the benefit of the doubt because they've been able to persuade their supporters that the problems are all the fault of others, saboteurs, the House of Lords, British judges, the Labour Party, Jean Claude Junker, Angela Merkel, the governor of the BoE, the Uk's ambassador to the EU, even their own Conservative Chancellor!

It will be interesting to see how they can realistically have the border at the Irish sea, I can't see the idea of British citizens needing permission from the EU to enter Northern Ireland going down well, instead of securing our borders we've effectively given an entire country to the European Union, one that the UK taxpayer will still be subsidising, oh yes the Brexit voters are going to absolutely love that one!

Whatever solution is found for the border situation the Brexiteers will try and spin it as some kind of success or victory, this has constantly been their saving grace, they control the narrative. No matter how bad things are going they are repeatedly given the benefit of the doubt because they've been able to persuade their supporters that the problems are all the fault of others, saboteurs, the House of Lords, British judges, the Labour Party, Jean Claude Junker, Angela Merkel, the governor of the BoE, the Uk's ambassador to the EU, even their own Conservative Chancellor!

It will be interesting to see how they can realistically have the border at the Irish sea, I can't see the idea of British citizens needing permission from the EU to enter Northern Ireland going down well, instead of securing our borders we've effectively given an entire country to the European Union, one that the UK taxpayer will still be subsidising, oh yes the Brexit voters are going to absolutely love that one!

I have believed for some time that N Ireland could well be the issue on which Brexshit founders. The only way to avoid the situation you quite rightly draw attention to is if the whole UK stays in both the Single Market and the Customs Union.

So much for "taking back control", hahaha.

The alternative is the razor wire solution, which everyone says they will not countenance, due to the danger of reigniting the Troubles.

...we are now living in age where fully a third of the adult population don't even have a hundred pounds in their bank accounts, where millions are in rent arrears having had their welfare cut & where food banks have become ubiquitous, indeed never have the most vulnerable ever been quite so vulnerable!

So they should save more and indulge less. If they were to spend less on phones, fags, alcohol, junk food and gambling they might find they have a half decent bank balance and better mental and physical health.
Did I hear today that Britain now has 63% of people overweight? Not me. My BMI is 22, well within range, and my percentage body fat is 17%, when the average is 25%. So where did I go wrong? Probably because I worked hard and was careful with my diet and my money.
But yes, my high street is full of food banks, loan sharks, chicken and burger bars, bookmakers, charity shops, beggars. It's a hazard of living today, and no question it's all down to Brexit.

I think it's about time we all realised that a quest for a European utopia is always going to fail.
Europe has tried with religion. The 30 Years War led to nearly a quarter of Germany's population wiped out.
It has tried with empire, revolution, political and race war. That led to at least 50 million deaths in the last century.
The EU is just the latest project about to fail.

Whatever solution is found for the border situation the Brexiteers will try and spin it as some kind of success or victory, this has constantly been their saving grace, they control the narrative. No matter how bad things are going they are repeatedly given the benefit of the doubt because they've been able to persuade their supporters that the problems are all the fault of others, saboteurs, the House of Lords, British judges, the Labour Party, Jean Claude Junker, Angela Merkel, the governor of the BoE, the Uk's ambassador to the EU, even their own Conservative Chancellor!

It will be interesting to see how they can realistically have the border at the Irish sea, I can't see the idea of British citizens needing permission from the EU to enter Northern Ireland going down well, instead of securing our borders we've effectively given an entire country to the European Union, one that the UK taxpayer will still be subsidising, oh yes the Brexit voters are going to absolutely love that one!

I have believed for some time that N Ireland could well be the issue on which Brexshit founders. The only way to avoid the situation you quite rightly draw attention to is if the whole UK stays in both the Single Market and the Customs Union.

So much for "taking back control", hahaha.

The alternative is the razor wire solution, which everyone says they will not countenance, due to the danger of reigniting the Troubles.

What is David Davis actually proposing as a solution? On the one hand, he's saying that Northern Ireland remaining in the Customs Union or Single Market is unacceptable, yet the Northern Irish border must remain open, how exactly is that supposed to work? If there is no external border to the Single Market or the Customs Union inside of Ireland (i.e. at the current existing Northern Irish border), then what exactly prevents or would stop the Customs Union & Single Market from extending into Northern Ireland or indeed across the whole island of Ireland itself, even beyond that, into England, Scotland & Wales, if we accept that the Irish Sea is merely a physical obstacle, (not a preventative border). Equally, that the whole of the UK would then have a foothold inside the Single Market & Customs Union, something which surely the rest of the EU's 27 member states & indeed EEA members are very unlikely to accept or allow. It just appears likely the Brexit Secretary is hoping most Brexit voters don't have the acuity to understand his position is just ridiculous nonsense!

Whatever solution is found for the border situation the Brexiteers will try and spin it as some kind of success or victory, this has constantly been their saving grace, they control the narrative. No matter how bad things are going they are repeatedly given the benefit of the doubt because they've been able to persuade their supporters that the problems are all the fault of others, saboteurs, the House of Lords, British judges, the Labour Party, Jean Claude Junker, Angela Merkel, the governor of the BoE, the Uk's ambassador to the EU, even their own Conservative Chancellor!

It will be interesting to see how they can realistically have the border at the Irish sea, I can't see the idea of British citizens needing permission from the EU to enter Northern Ireland going down well, instead of securing our borders we've effectively given an entire country to the European Union, one that the UK taxpayer will still be subsidising, oh yes the Brexit voters are going to absolutely love that one!

I have believed for some time that N Ireland could well be the issue on which Brexshit founders. The only way to avoid the situation you quite rightly draw attention to is if the whole UK stays in both the Single Market and the Customs Union.

So much for "taking back control", hahaha.

The alternative is the razor wire solution, which everyone says they will not countenance, due to the danger of reigniting the Troubles.

What is David Davis actually proposing as a solution? On the one hand, he's saying that Northern Ireland remaining in the Customs Union or Single Market is unacceptable, yet the Northern Irish border must remain open, how exactly is that supposed to work? If there is no external border to the Single Market or the Customs Union inside of Ireland (i.e. at the current existing Northern Irish border), then what exactly prevents or would stop the Customs Union & Single Market from extending into Northern Ireland or indeed across the whole island of Ireland itself, even beyond that, into England, Scotland & Wales, if we accept that the Irish Sea is merely a physical obstacle, (not a preventative border). Equally, that the whole of the UK would then have a foothold inside the Single Market & Customs Union, something which surely the rest of the EU's 27 member states & indeed EEA members are very unlikely to accept or allow. It just appears likely the Brexit Secretary is hoping most Brexit voters don't have the acuity to understand his position is just ridiculous nonsense!

It is barmy. Even if the EU were to offer the UK free membership of the single market and the customs union while allowing us to restrict movement of people, we could not achieve the goal of restricting movement unless there was a hard border somewhere, at which people could be scrutinised before admission. So we would need it even if they didn't.

Unless......is he arrogant enough to think that the whole of Ireland might agree to exit the single market and the customs union, just to solve the UK's problem? Then he could get the Gardai to exercise the necessary checks upon entering or leaving either Eire or the UK. But that would effectively mean the Irish agreeing to leave the EU, just to please the UK. There is zero chance of that.

Nope, the whole thing is mad. Can Davis really be so stupid he can't see this? Or are the Brexshitters now deep into cognitive dissonance, whereby they know at one level it can't work, but at another are unable to let go of their silly swivel-eyed dream? Could be. Half of them look mad (Gove, Rees-Mogg, Redwood).

Given that UK government doesn't wish to remain in the Single Market or the Customs Union they have to have an actual way to prevent any incursion into UK territory, now traditionally this would have been fairly straightforward and simple by having a UK border, however David Davis has ruled out having a physical preventative border between Southern Ireland (Eire) & Northern Ireland, so logically this leaves only two other sensible locations. The first of these would be the Irish Sea, but this would then separate Northern Ireland from the rest of the United Kingdom and leave it inside the Single Market & Customs Union, effectively under the authority of the EU, thus requiring EU permission for anything entering or exiting Northern Ireland, even though the UK Government & UK taxpayers would still hold legal & financially responsibilities towards the territory, thus Davis & his DUP Governmental allies have been quick to rule this out as a potential option.

What we're left with, is something you've already quite correctly concluded as a total non-starter, thus having a preventative border between the UK & the EU at the Southern Irish (Eire) border, requiring Eire to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, potentially having to leave the entire EU in the process! Can't see the Irish ever going for that one!

Back to square one, a hard border between Northern Ireland & Eire, putting the entire Northern Irish economy at risk & the Good Friday Peace Agreement in serious jeopardy, (already ruled out by the Government).

So yes Barmy alright! It's almost as if Davis is deliberately trying to scupper any kind of EU deal to actually engineer a hard Brexit, not much else makes any kind of sense at this juncture. If the Brexit Secretary has actually got a sensible solution to this mess it's about time we were all told what it is!

Given that UK government doesn't wish to remain in the Single Market or the Customs Union they have to have an actual way to prevent any incursion into UK territory, now traditionally this would have been fairly straightforward and simple by having a UK border, however David Davis has ruled out having a physical preventative border between Southern Ireland (Eire) & Northern Ireland, so logically this leaves only two other sensible locations. The first of these would be the Irish Sea, but this would then separate Northern Ireland from the rest of the United Kingdom and leave it inside the Single Market & Customs Union, effectively under the authority of the EU, thus requiring EU permission for anything entering or exiting Northern Ireland, even though the UK Government & UK taxpayers would still hold legal & financially responsibilities towards the territory, thus Davis & his DUP Governmental allies have been quick to rule this out as a potential option.

What we're left with, is something you've already quite correctly concluded as a total non-starter, thus having a preventative border between the UK & the EU at the Southern Irish (Eire) border, requiring Eire to leave the Single Market & Customs Union, potentially having to leave the entire EU in the process! Can't see the Irish ever going for that one!

Back to square one, a hard border between Northern Ireland & Eire, putting the entire Northern Irish economy at risk & the Good Friday Peace Agreement in serious jeopardy, (already ruled out by the Government).

So yes Barmy alright! It's almost as if Davis is deliberately trying to scupper any kind of EU deal to actually engineer a hard Brexit, not much else makes any kind of sense at this juncture. If the Brexit Secretary has actually got a sensible solution to this mess it's about time we were all told what it is!

But surely it CAN'T be the last option you suggest. A hard Brexshit (crash out of customs union and single market with no agreements on anything) would mean razor wire across Ireland for sure. That's my point, in part! There is no way to avoid the razor wire unless NI, at a minimum, stays in both - and the DUP may well demand the whole UK stays in both, to avoid any perception of weakening the bond between NI and the rest of the UK.

The Hard Brexshitters are fcuked, unless they are prepared to risk a re-run of the Troubles!

I'm not suggesting any viable options, instead, explaining that the proposed options being discussed are all unworkable & thus demonstrating that the position of the Brexiteers is untenable. The options currently on the table were either impossible to start with, or have been made politically unacceptable by the actions of Davis & Brexiteers, even further so with the Conservative government now being in bed with the DUP.

Please be under no illusion, I'm not disagreeing with you in any way, shape or form, everything you have said thus far is spot on! Unfortunately, however, given the tone of the discussions taking place, even those being debated on the BBC's website, it appears that people either just don't fully understand the situation, or they are living in denial over what may happen if there isn't a deal. Quite as to why so many appear to believe that there is already a viable solution on the table being openly discussed remains somewhat of a mystery, given that, strangely, none of them can seem to logically explain what this solution actually is!

It would certainly be very interesting though to see how the Brexiteers would react to such a demand from the DUP, for the whole of the UK to stay in the Single Market & Customs Union, especially if the EU then decides to make this conditional upon the UK continuing to accept freedom of movement! The cynic in me imagines they would probably try and scupper the whole deal, whilst simultaneously attempting to place the blame for the collapse at the door of the EU. But seriously, can anyone now still honestly believe that the Brexiteers genuinely care about the fate of Northern Ireland or whether Ireland ends up being divided by razor wire, surely the only thing they truly care about is finding someone else to blame so as not to incur the wrath of their DUP coalition partners when everything hits the fan.

I'm not suggesting any viable options, instead, explaining that the proposed options being discussed are all unworkable & thus demonstrating that the position of the Brexiteers is untenable. The options currently on the table were either impossible to start with, or have been made politically unacceptable by the actions of Davis & Brexiteers, even further so with the Conservative government now being in bed with the DUP.

Please be under no illusion, I'm not disagreeing with you in any way, shape or form, everything you have said thus far is spot on! Unfortunately, however, given the tone of the discussions taking place, even those being debated on the BBC's website, it appears that people either just don't fully understand the situation, or they are living in denial over what may happen if there isn't a deal. Quite as to why so many appear to believe that there is already a viable solution on the table being openly discussed remains somewhat of a mystery, given that, strangely, none of them can seem to logically explain what this solution actually is!

It would certainly be very interesting though to see how the Brexiteers would react to such a demand from the DUP, for the whole of the UK to stay in the Single Market & Customs Union, especially if the EU then decides to make this conditional upon the UK continuing to accept freedom of movement! The cynic in me imagines they would probably try and scupper the whole deal, whilst simultaneously attempting to place the blame for the collapse at the door of the EU. But seriously, can anyone now still honestly believe that the Brexiteers genuinely care about the fate of Northern Ireland or whether Ireland ends up being divided by razor wire, surely the only thing they truly care about is finding someone else to blame so as not to incur the wrath of their DUP coalition partners when everything hits the fan.

That is exactly the conclusion I have come to as well. I suspect the game now is to stall long enough for it to be the EU (and therefore Ireland) that has to demand the razor wire, in order to exert border control over entry of goods to the EU. The Brexshitters of course also need the same border control, to stop EU immigration, but they can slipstream behind the EU's demand for it while painting the EU as black as possible.

I read an article in yesterday's Torygraph by Charles Moore (who use to edit it, when it was still a half-serious paper), in which he claimed Ireland and the UK could "perfectly easily" come to a special arrangement over the border, if it were not for the EU's dogmatic insistence that Ireland can't have special status. But he did not explain - at all - what this "special status" he apparently advocates would need to involve. As far as I can see it would entail the whole of Ireland leaving the single market and the customs union, in effect leaving the EU, just as a favour to the UK! The breathtaking arrogance and lack of realism of that attitude may, I fear, be quite common in Hard Brexshit thinking.

But it is I think also noteworthy that even the Torygraph, well-connected to Brexshit Tories though it is, cannot put up a Rees-Mogg, or a Daniel Hannan, or a John Redwood, or someone, with a clever explanaton of how this problem can be solved. They have no solution. There is no solution, except for special status for N Ireland.

Pragmatically, I'd have thought that could be a big win for N Ireland, which after all voted to remain in the EU by a large margin. Their continued participation in the customs union and the single market would attract inward investment from the rest of the UK. It would be a massive shot in the arm for their economy. But the DUP would have to be reassured - somehow - that it did not threaten NI's membership of the UK. That would be hard to do, as it would look a lot like it, with passport control and customs inspection at Belfast as you board a ship or plane to the rest of the UK.

It has the feel that there could be some kind of a grand bargain involving the 4 parties -and the prize might also include a new atmosphere on the island of Ireland providing political stability for the foreseeable future.

No, I can't see how it could be put together but if it really is the linchpin of any catastrophe or success scenario then perhaps some smart mind might devise a political/economic devise that would allow everyone to move forward.

Suppose the UK really does fall off the EU cliff edge might some kind of a special status for NI in both the UK and the EU actually have benefits for Brittanicus Rumpus?

By the way my solution to the anti EU sentiment in the lead up to the referendum might have been along the lines of the good soldier Schweik.(instead of the plonker squaddy who stayed in lines as the line took a step back**)

It has the feel that there could be some kind of a grand bargain involving the 4 parties -and the prize might also include a new atmosphere on the island of Ireland providing political stability for the foreseeable future.

No, I can't see how it could be put together but if it really is the linchpin of any catastrophe or success scenario then perhaps some smart mind might devise a political/economic devise that would allow everyone to move forward.

Suppose the UK really does fall off the EU cliff edge might some kind of a special status for NI in both the UK and the EU actually have benefits for Brittanicus Rumpus?

By the way my solution to the anti EU sentiment in the lead up to the referendum might have been along the lines of the good soldier Schweik.(instead of the plonker squaddy who stayed in lines as the line took a step back**)

I can't see how it is a question of a "bargain", though. It is a fact that if the UK is outside the single market, tariffs and verification of compliance with EU standards for goods WILL be required. This immediately opens an opportunity for smuggling, from the UK to the EU.

For example, I can import cheap, substandard electric irons from China, get them across the Irish border into the EU, and sell them at a price just a bit below that of the more expensive irons that comply with EU safety regulations - and make a killing, perhaps literally when they catch fire! Conversely if the UK wishes to control immigration from the EU, they MUST have border checks to stop unauthorised people getting in, or they will just take a plane to Dublin, walk across the hills and pitch up in Belfast, from where they can fly to Leeds and annoy the locals with their funny accents, or whatever it is that riles Brexshitters about them.

These are unalterable facts. No bargain can wish them away. The hard border has to be somewhere. It is then purely a question of WHERE would be the least damaging and contentious place to put it.

The hard border has to be somewhere. It is then purely a question of WHERE would be the least damaging and contentious place to put it.

In one line you have very succinctly summarised this entire problem. Please bear with me if I use a few more whilst explaining it for those who may not be quite so familiar with all the issues involved.

The island of Ireland, is an island divided into two separate territories, in the south we have Eire, this is an independent country, in the north we have Northern Ireland which, although technically a country in its own right & now with its own government, it is actually a territory of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland, the clue is in the name!

Although the north & south are different, because of the long history of violence on the island, today they share an open border as part of the peace process and are able to trade freely with each other under EU rules, (though Northern Ireland still gets subsidies from the UK Government & UK tax payers because of its status as part of the UK and because it isn't as wealthy as England).

The Irish situation at the moment works well because both North & South are both members of the EU & by extension Customs Union & Single Market, thus play by the same rules, however, now the UK wishes to leave the EU, Northern Ireland will get pulled out of the Single Market & Customs Union, that is, unless there is some kind of special arrangement, but this then would require both the EU & UK Government agreeing to it, something which at present presents some major challenges. Yet even a special arrangement for Northern Ireland still doesn't solve the issue of separation for the UK & EU without first solving the issue of where to place a hard border.

In order for the UK to be out of the Single Market & Customs Union, it requires a hard (preventative) border between the UK & EU, equally in order to protect the EU's Customs Union & Single Market from a UK no longer following EU rules & regulations, the EU requires that a hard (preventative) border is in place between them as well. So they both need a border, it could be the same border, but for the purpose of separation a border must exist.

Now this is the real issue, because now it is politically impossible to put that border anywhere inside, or on the island of Ireland, (to do so could destroy the peace process), the UK Conservative Government is in Coalition with Northern Irish DUP MP's who wouldn't accept a hard border between which would divide Ireland.

So without an EU - UK border in Ireland, then it has to go somewhere inside the UK or EU and the DUP would never accept such a border inside the UK as it would separate Northern Ireland from the rest of the United Kingdom. Out of the 3 potential places to put the hard border, now only inside of the EU remains, but not anywhere in Ireland, thus meaning Eire would first have to agree to leave the EU and end up in some kind of open border union with the UK. The problem here is that this simply makes no sense, Eire has given no such intention that it would ever be prepared to leave the EU, also to do so from their perspective would be hugely financially damaging with almost absolutely nothing to gain.

The only conclusion that can logically be drawn from the current situation is that no viable solution as yet exists, certainly not one that has been put forward. If a solution isn't found then Northern Ireland will be forced out of the Single Market & Customs Union, they will have a hard border imposed upon them and in all likelihood their economy will suffer a massive shock. Years of peace may be shattered if this issue becomes the catalyst for a return to violence by a population once again divided and by one that voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union yet is being ignored and shown that democracy in their country holds no value.

Seems like it is a big ask to expect the different parts of Ireland to willingly accept a physical border (for political/security as much as economic reasons)

If this is the fly in the ointment why not attempt to get all of the island onboard so that most of the UK can have its hard border with the EU ?

Can the Unionists in NI not be bribed politically and economically by the EU ,UK and the South of Ireland so that what they see themselves as giving up might in their eyes be compensated for?

Don't ask me for details.Does the general idea have any legs?

There is an Irish ex-CEO of Unilever writing in today's FT who suggests a solution whereby the UK leaves the official EU customs union but agrees some sort of equivalence to it. However he does not provide any details or examples to illustrate what he means.

Having though further about this, it seems to me the people smuggling aspect may not, after all, be a real issue. Since EU people wanting to come to the UK do so in order to be here legally, to work, they would see little point in walking across the hills illegally to Belfast and taking a boat to Britain. It is simply that May makes a big fuss about controlling our borders so that we have an inventory of who has comes in and who has left, and you obviously can't do that accurately if people can go to and from the EU in Ireland without any monitoring. So if she is prepared to give up that goal, the people thing can possibly be left alone. Which is good, as it means you probably don't need razor wire across the island.

There will however be an incentive to smuggle goods if the UK regulatory regime does not track exactly the EU one. Maybe that can be solved if the UK agrees in perpetuity to abide by all Brussels Single Market regulations. Perhaps we can do that without being - officially - in the Single Market, just by choosing, of our own volition, to copy all Brussels diktats. (It's called taking back control, you see.) And then you would perhaps not need a border, provided the EU takes our word for it that we apply all their rules, so that we won't try to export to them chlorinated chicken or dangerous Chinese electrical goods or whatever.

There is an Irish ex-CEO of Unilever writing in today's FT who suggests a solution whereby the UK leaves the official EU customs union but agrees some sort of equivalence to it. However he does not provide any details or examples to illustrate what he means.

Having though further about this, it seems to me the people smuggling aspect may not, after all, be a real issue. Since EU people wanting to come to the UK do so in order to be here legally, to work, they would see little point in walking across the hills illegally to Belfast and taking a boat to Britain. It is simply that May makes a big fuss about controlling our borders so that we have an inventory of who has comes in and who has left, and you obviously can't do that accurately if people can go to and from the EU in Ireland without any monitoring. So if she is prepared to give up that goal, the people thing can possibly be left alone. Which is good, as it means you probably don't need razor wire across the island.

There will however be an incentive to smuggle goods if the UK regulatory regime does not track exactly the EU one. Maybe that can be solved if the UK agrees in perpetuity to abide by all Brussels Single Market regulations. Perhaps we can do that without being - officially - in the Single Market, just by choosing, of our own volition, to copy all Brussels diktats. (It's called taking back control, you see.) And then you would perhaps not need a border, provided the EU takes our word for it that we apply all their rules, so that we won't try to export to them chlorinated chicken or dangerous Chinese electrical goods or whatever.

I am just waiting now to see what happens (re the border) since events seem to be crowding in and necessity is the mother of all invention.

Yes that's right, though it is not finalised. It looks as though it will be between €45-55bn or thereabouts. That is just to settle the outstanding commitments we made as members, to be paid over a considerable number of years, as these various commitment fall due.

It does not give us anything in return, save for enough goodwill for a constructive trade negotiation. If we can settle the Ireland border question to the satisfaction of the EU, esp. Ireland, that is.

So, reality bites at last.

My guess - it can only be a guess - is we will end up with a Norway type trade agreement, with effective membership of the single market, though probably not in name and effective membership of the customs union too, though not in in name. If so, we can expect to have to pay continuing annual fees for the privilege, which go towards upkeep of the systems and standards that Brussels maintains on behalf of the members, so that the single market can function. The good news about that is that it would avoid duplicating all the associated bureaucracy - and cost - back here.

I think the big question is whether we can gain such market access without the free movement of people.

They all have jobs, practically. Benefit tourism seems to be largely a myth. But yes they are starting to go. This will add to inflation, since employers will in many cases have to pay more to get Brits to do the work, if they have the skills, which often they don't. The joke is that we will reduce immigration of people from cultures like ours European, Christian, industrialised societies) in favour of immigration of people from the Indian subcontinent and Africa, who are far less likely to fit in.

I suppose a case can be made that the shortage of skilled labour may force the country to pay better wages for skilled labour and encourage more people to get trained. That would probably be a good thing overall. But the dislocation will be painful - it take time to train people, and even longer before they work out from changes in labour rates it is a good idea to show up for training.

The joke is that we will reduce immigration of people from cultures like ours European, Christian, industrialised societies) in favour of immigration of people from the Indian subcontinent and Africa, who are far less likely to fit in.

The Indian (or certainly Asian) surgeons have been good to me this year with 2 operations for skin cancer. An Asian doctor and an Egyptian one almost certainly saved my life a few years ago.
So I say goodbye to the Eastern European mercenaries who came here for the dough but have now found a falling pound not good value to send money home. They are always going to go where the money is. We shouldn't flatter ourselves they were pro British.

The joke is that we will reduce immigration of people from cultures like ours European, Christian, industrialised societies) in favour of immigration of people from the Indian subcontinent and Africa, who are far less likely to fit in.

The Indian (or certainly Asian) surgeons have been good to me this year with 2 operations for skin cancer. An Asian doctor and an Egyptian one almost certainly saved my life a few years ago.
So I say goodbye to the Eastern European mercenaries who came here for the dough but have now found a falling pound not good value to send money home. They are always going to go where the money is. We shouldn't flatter ourselves they were pro British.

Indeed, I'm sure they were no more pro-British than I was pro-Arab when I worked in Dubai for 3 years, or pro-American when I worked in Houston for 2 years or pro-Dutch when I worked in The Hague for 3 years. We all go where the money is, when we are young and saving for a house or a family. But they may have found, as I did in all three places, reasons to like and respect aspects of the culture and the people. And they will have leant or improved their knowledge of the local language. But I expect also, as was true for me, they found reasons for not staying indefinitely. That's normal and is why EU immigration was never fundamentally a threat to the UK.

So, a 1st stage agreement, then. ~€40bn to settle existing commitments, as they fall due, an agreement on EU citizens in the UK, whereby our courts will take account of ECJ judgements for a period of 8 years, and a commitment for the whole of the UK to subscribe to a trade deal that is close enough to the EU single market and customs provisions for a hard border in Ireland not to be required by either party. And, if no tailor-made deal can be agreed, the fallback will be adhere to EU rules. Sounds a bit like a Norway agreement. From what I have read, it seems that a Canada type deal would not do the trick where the border is concerned, much though Davis seems to favour this type of deal.

At all events, a hard Brexsh1t (e.g. reversion to WTO rules) seems now to be out of the question, as that would not meet the border criteria. Thank God that lunacy has been put to bed. It would have wrecked manufacturing industry in the UK.

A good result, it seems to me, as far as it goes. If we were able to negotiate something like a Norway agreement but with some additional provisions restricting movement of people (The Norwegians don't worry too much about that, seeing as not many people speak their language or want to live in Norway), we might be able to satisfy the chief grudge people had against the EU and avoid wrecking our trade or giving ourselves shedloads of pointless extra bureaucracy, all in the name of "taking back control".

But I am sure we will find we need to continue to make payments towards the upkeep of the Single Market system that the EU has so painstakingly constructed, if we want full access to it.

It begins to look as if May is leveraging her weakness to let the Brexsh1tters gradually realise the facts of of life when dealing with an economic superpower and thereby manage their fantasy expectations downward by degrees, towards something sensible and achievable.

One thing that I find notable in the events of the last few weeks is the power small nations acquire by being part of the European Union. Ireland has a population 1/15th that of the UK, but has been able to get what it wanted, much to the surprise and discomfort of people like Bozo, who have never taken "the Micks" seriously.

I suspect Varadkar may have earned a place in British history as the man that helped save the Brits from themselves by forcing them to stay fully engaged with the EU, even while leaving it.

One thing that I find notable in the events of the last few weeks is the power small nations acquire by being part of the European Union.

And even the regions. Which is why it is monumentally stupid for the people of Cornwall, say, to have been in favour of Brexit.

But it does sound like the only way to solve " the Irish problem" is for us to effectively remain as part of the union, at least as far as free trade goes. Which will mean remaining compliant with all those rules imposed by "Europe" (except we will now have no say on what those rules are) and almost certainly some level of free movement.

It'll be more of a Brexnot.

Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore

One thing that I find notable in the events of the last few weeks is the power small nations acquire by being part of the European Union.

And even the regions. Which is why it is monumentally stupid for the people of Cornwall, say, to have been in favour of Brexit.

But it does sound like the only way to solve " the Irish problem" is for us to effectively remain as part of the union, at least as far as free trade goes. Which will mean remaining compliant with all those rules imposed by "Europe" (except we will now have no say on what those rules are) and almost certainly some level of free movement.

It'll be more of a Brexnot.

Yes, but maybe not a bad outcome. I'm coming to the conclusion that the previous idea, which people like Nick Clegg still champion, of an inner and outer circle of EU membership, does not seem to have any traction in the EU. So our previous rather anomalous status, outside the Euro in perpetuity, and our opting out of the 'ever-closer-union" drive, would come under pressure in the end. So perhaps we really do belong with Norway, as a country that is fully wedded to the trade aspects but not to the political goals.

I continue to believe there is a niche for countries such as ourselves, Norway and Switzerland, who want more or less that type of relationship. It would be good if at some future point this could form a common grouping, to increase our clout in negotiating. But maybe not, seeing as the reason for all 3 countries staying out is our refusal to team up with anybody else!

Site in its death throes? Much like other things today.
Young people are only interested in social media. They don't care much for politics either, but they will blame older people for voting to leave when some of them couldn't be bothered to vote.

Should we have another referendum when the terms are known?
Then if Brexit is overturned, a final decider.

Site in its death throes? Much like other things today.
Young people are only interested in social media. They don't care much for politics either, but they will blame older people for voting to leave when some of them couldn't be bothered to vote.

Should we have another referendum when the terms are known?
Then if Brexit is overturned, a final decider.

No ,for better or worse the decision was made. But the manner of the country leaving is the question now....and there don't seem many good options.

Maybe a general election rather than a second/third referendum to select MPs to ratify the terms (if any).

Site in its death throes? Much like other things today.
Young people are only interested in social media. They don't care much for politics either, but they will blame older people for voting to leave when some of them couldn't be bothered to vote.

Should we have another referendum when the terms are known?
Then if Brexit is overturned, a final decider.

No ,for better or worse the decision was made. But the manner of the country leaving is the question now....and there don't seem many good options.

Maybe a general election rather than a second/third referendum to select MPs to ratify the terms (if any).

I can't really think of any thing sensible to suggest.

If we can manage to stay in the Single Market (paying for it of course) and the customs union, while keeping some figleaf of control of immigration, that will not be a bad outcome for the country. The Hard Brexsh1tters' pipedream was always a fantasy and that is what is slowly being exposed now, as we get down to the wire.

Bozo and Gove have gone quiet and it is only the "Impossiblists" like the Moggatollah and Peter Bone(head) who still argue for crashing out - and having the 10 mile queues on the M20 and the destruction of our motor industry.

Ivan Rogers gave a good lecture on the issue in Glasgow some weeks ago. What the Brexsh1tters have always stubbornly refused to recognise is that the EU is a matrix of agreements and treaties among 27 member countries. They simply cannot cut special deals here and there for a leaving member, even if they wanted to, as it would bring the whole edifice crashing down. That is the reason why the Brits treat it as a negotiation while the Continentals think of it as a legal process to find a solution that doesn't pull the structure to bits. All this talk of EU "bullying" misses this essential point. They play hardball because it is all they can do if they want to keep the structure intact, which of course is their top priority, not trade with the UK as Bozo and co have so arrogantly assumed.

By the way I find the Galileo business amusing. Of course they are chucking us out. One is tempted to use the (by now well-worn) phrase to those who whine about it: "What part of leave do you not understand?"

What the Brexsh1tters have always stubbornly refused to recognise is that the EU is a matrix of agreements and treaties among 27 member countries.

The SNP had their referendum, and despite loading the dice in their favour, they failed because they lacked a clear vision on issues such as the currency. Now it seems, we lack a clear vision on Brexit.
We voted for it in order to take back control from a union that has become too big and too complex. They will try and punish us to deter other nations from quitting.
How can we ever know what the future holds? Economics is not a precise science. The predictions it makes fails to take account of unknowns. If the pound loses more value then that's good for exports. I quite like the idea of the UK being a tiger economy on the edge of Europe. Let's be positive.

What the Brexsh1tters have always stubbornly refused to recognise is that the EU is a matrix of agreements and treaties among 27 member countries.

The SNP had their referendum, and despite loading the dice in their favour, they failed because they lacked a clear vision on issues such as the currency. Now it seems, we lack a clear vision on Brexit.
We voted for it in order to take back control from a union that has become too big and too complex. They will try and punish us to deter other nations from quitting.
How can we ever know what the future holds? Economics is not a precise science. The predictions it makes fails to take account of unknowns. If the pound loses more value then that's good for exports. I quite like the idea of the UK being a tiger economy on the edge of Europe. Let's be positive.

"Taking back control" is one of the fantasies I was talking about. As John Major pointed out, the only nation with complete control is - or was - N Korea. The moment you have a trade agreement or treaty of any kind, you lose some "control" because you agree to abide by conditions set by others and mostly likely arbitration in case of dispute by a jurisdiction other than your own. The fact that half our trade is with the EU is ample reason why we sacrifice more control to the EU than to other entities. A trade agreement with the US similarly involves agreeing to comply with US standards and regulations. Loss of "control", again.

But I am now more optimistic than I was about Brexsh1t, as it looks as if we will now stay in the single market and the customs union, or as near as makes no difference. If that happens, we stand a decent chance of maintaining peace in N Ireland and allowing the integrated supply chains that so much of our manufacturing relies on to stay intact. Plus the advantage of not having to waste billions on redeveloping UK-only standards and regulations for goods, when we already have a perfectly good service for doing that, provided - at a cost - by the EU, which guarantees acceptance of British goods in 27 other countries.

The UK leaving the EU will be double the pleasure: Escape from Camp 28 (number of EU members).

Well I hope you enjoy it, even though from the look of it we will still be in the single market and customs union and still bound by EU regulations (and in a number of respects by the European Court of Justice). You'll have a blue passport of course, something unlike any previous British passport (they used to be black - I have several in my bottom drawer).

The "backstop to the backstop" was mooted when the Brits tried to argue that the backstop proposal for temporary membership of the customs union should be time-limited. It is obvious that, if time-limited, it is isn't a backstop any more. So the EU said that, if the Brits insisted on a time limit for customs union membership, then they would require a "backstop to the backstop".

Since then we have had the idiotic proposal from Raab that Britain should unilaterally be able to walk away from customs membership, irrespective of whether or not an agreed system to retain a soft border was in place. The Brexsh1tters clearly have not through the Irish border issue and cannot now wish it away. As I said earlier, the entire plan for a trade agreement is likely to founder on this issue, which the Brits seems incapable of addressing seriously.

The one card in their favour is that if Britain does crash out with no agreement a hard border is guaranteed. So they can hold a gun to the EU's head and say: "Either agree to a temporary customs arrangement we can unilaterally cancel, or you get a hard border for sure." That would amount to turning the peaceful future in Ireland into a bargaining chip, which would be a fairly disgusting abdication of their Irish responsibilities by the UK, but they may be desperate enough to try it on.

I continue to think a crash-out is a very likely outcome, due to the inability of the many ideological factions in British politics to compromise for the economic good of the country. They think the UK voted to get poorer in pursuit of some noble goal of theirs.

The "backstop to the backstop" was mooted when the Brits tried to argue that the backstop proposal for temporary membership of the customs union should be time-limited. It is obvious that, if time-limited, it is isn't a backstop any more. So the EU said that, if the Brits insisted on a time limit for customs union membership, then they would require a "backstop to the backstop".

Since then we have had the idiotic proposal from Raab that Britain should unilaterally be able to walk away from customs membership, irrespective of whether or not an agreed system to retain a soft border was in place. The Brexsh1tters clearly have not through the Irish border issue and cannot now wish it away. As I said earlier, the entire plan for a trade agreement is likely to founder on this issue, which the Brits seems incapable of addressing seriously.

The one card in their favour is that if Britain does crash out with no agreement a hard border is guaranteed. So they can hold a gun to the EU's head and say: "Either agree to a temporary customs arrangement we can unilaterally cancel, or you get a hard border for sure." That would amount to turning the peaceful future in Ireland into a bargaining chip, which would be a fairly disgusting abdication of their Irish responsibilities by the UK, but they may be desperate enough to try it on.

I continue to think a crash-out is a very likely outcome, due to the inability of the many ideological factions in British politics to compromise for the economic good of the country. They think the UK voted to get poorer in pursuit of some noble goal of theirs.

So my confusion was in thinking that the backstop only applied (in first application) to the Irish border?

The "backstop to the backstop" was mooted when the Brits tried to argue that the backstop proposal for temporary membership of the customs union should be time-limited. It is obvious that, if time-limited, it is isn't a backstop any more. So the EU said that, if the Brits insisted on a time limit for customs union membership, then they would require a "backstop to the backstop".

Since then we have had the idiotic proposal from Raab that Britain should unilaterally be able to walk away from customs membership, irrespective of whether or not an agreed system to retain a soft border was in place. The Brexsh1tters clearly have not through the Irish border issue and cannot now wish it away. As I said earlier, the entire plan for a trade agreement is likely to founder on this issue, which the Brits seems incapable of addressing seriously.

The one card in their favour is that if Britain does crash out with no agreement a hard border is guaranteed. So they can hold a gun to the EU's head and say: "Either agree to a temporary customs arrangement we can unilaterally cancel, or you get a hard border for sure." That would amount to turning the peaceful future in Ireland into a bargaining chip, which would be a fairly disgusting abdication of their Irish responsibilities by the UK, but they may be desperate enough to try it on.

I continue to think a crash-out is a very likely outcome, due to the inability of the many ideological factions in British politics to compromise for the economic good of the country. They think the UK voted to get poorer in pursuit of some noble goal of theirs.

So my confusion was in thinking that the backstop only applied (in first application) to the Irish border?

It was/is wider ranging?

Yes inevitably. The backstop proposal, now - a big concession won by May actually - is for the whole of the UK to stay in the customs union (or an equivalent), so as to avoid singling out NI, since the Daieoupaiegh refuse to contemplate such a thing, until a permanent trade deal is done that allows the border to stay soft.

The Brexsh1tters are panicking, because they know their claim, that an open border can be maintained even if we leave the customs union by means of new IT methods, is just hot air and won't work. So they fear that when this gradually becomes clear, the UK will be stuck forever in a customs union. This they see as bad, because it prevents the UK striking exciting new trade deals with Botswana and similar pisspot countries that the EU does not already have a far better agreement with than any we could strike.

Personally I think staying in the customs union would be a good thing for us, compared to the alternatives - unless we decide not to leave after all, of course.

Yes inevitably. The backstop proposal, now - a big concession won by May actually - is for the whole of the UK to stay in the customs union (or an equivalent), so as to avoid singling out NI, since the Daieoupaiegh refuse to contemplate such a thing, until a permanent trade deal is done that allows the border to stay soft.

The Brexsh1tters are panicking, because they know their claim, that an open border can be maintained even if we leave the customs union by means of new IT methods, is just hot air and won't work. So they fear that when this gradually becomes clear, the UK will be stuck forever in a customs union. This they see as bad, because it prevents the UK striking exciting new trade deals with Botswana and similar pisspot countries that the EU does not already have a far better agreement with than any we could strike.

Personally I think staying in the customs union would be a good thing for us, compared to the alternatives - unless we decide not to leave after all, of course.

I thought the EU was considered to be extremely averse to giving favourable treatment to exiteers since that would encourage others to follow and lead to the breakup of the EU.

I wonder why they agreed to that then(the potential UK wide customs union)....is it not a big deal for them really?

I thought the EU was considered to be extremely averse to giving favourable treatment to exiteers since that would encourage others to follow and lead to the breakup of the EU.

I wonder why they agreed to that then(the potential UK wide customs union)....is it not a big deal for them really?

I suppose they may have had their arms twisted by Ireland. Ireland of course is deeply concerned about a hard border coming back. And they may calculate that the UK might eventually come up with some deal that preserves an open border. Or it may simply be that they can get payments from the UK and the UK will be in a position of rule-taker, neither of which will be a comfortable state of affairs for any other country thinking of leaving to find itself in.

My brother and I agreed that May reminds us of Captain McWhirr in Conrad's "Typhoon", a person whose very stolidity and lack of imagination enables him to take his steamer through a typhoon, when anyone else would have seen the risks and turned back.

She may now face a leadership challenge, but I've a feeling she might survive it. I wonder who in the Tory party really wants her job at this juncture - seems like the ultimate hospital pass to me.

But British politics right now reminds me of the opening sequence of "Stingray", with stirring military music and the panicky announcement that "Anything can happen in the next half hour", followed by a shot of a giant mechanical fish leaping through the air, various things blowing up, Gerry Anderson-style, etc.

... I wonder who in the Tory party really wants her job at this juncture - seems like the ultimate hospital pass to me.

oh, I can think of a few - Johnson, Gove and Rees-Moggie

I was actually chuckling to myself that Bozo would HATE to take over now, because he would have to own the turd he produced via his mendacious Brexsh1t campaign. The Moggatollah can't be a serious prospect. I don't see the Tories choosing yet another Old Etonian actually. I think they have to go for a man or woman of the people. "Joe 90" Gove would fit the bill, as would Javid. Pity Ruth Davidson is unavailable. Amber Rudd? Justine Greening??

what was that old Chinese curse again ? may you live in interesting times ...

I agree that we do seem to be living through a sort of waking nightmare, in which one feels one could wake up at any moment with relief. I've only had this feeling once before, which was in the run up to the Iraq invasion. But it's real......

May, I suspect, is earning grudging respect, just like Capt. McWhirr, for her dogged persistence. These fools like Davis think they can just go back and negotiate a better deal. The Moggatollah, on the other hand, is in favour of "threatening" the EU with crashing out. There is no doubt in my mind that if this were tried, the EU would say, "Sorry to hear that, but it's your choice: go ahead then".

So there is no consensus on the part of those who disagree as to what they propose instead! That alone may mean that May gets it through in the end. I have serious doubts that she will be deposed - most MPS must realise that changing the leader will not make the problem go away or make it easier to solve.

Then Bozo's your man! He's started on the anti-muslim dogwhistling already. Just the man to try to get a better deal by sending a gunboat to shell Calais. Or there's the Moggatollah of course. Admittedly the top hat and pennyfarthing are a bit eccentric but both are Old Etonians so must be good chaps.

Bozo is a clown and like the present incumbent, we don't need one in charge.

He's started on the anti-muslim dogwhistling already. Just the man to try to get a better deal by sending a gunboat to shell Calais. Or there's the Moggatollah of course. Admittedly the top hat and pennyfarthing are a bit eccentric but both are Old Etonians so must be good chaps.

If Bojo, who I think you mean, is anti Muslim then the "Moggatollah" will not be on his side.

Bozo is a clown and like the present incumbent, we don't need one in charge.

He's started on the anti-muslim dogwhistling already. Just the man to try to get a better deal by sending a gunboat to shell Calais. Or there's the Moggatollah of course. Admittedly the top hat and pennyfarthing are a bit eccentric but both are Old Etonians so must be good chaps.

If Bojo, who I think you mean, is anti Muslim then the "Moggatollah" will not be on his side.

Scandalous lies this morning, from Dominic Raab, still peddling the Brexshitter myth that if we walk away from a deal we can avoid paying the £39bn we owe the EU. Anyone who has been party to the negotiations will be well aware that this sum is what the UK has committed to pay while it was a member and for the greater part of which we are legally liable.

If we choose to crash out with no deal and then refuse to pay this, we can be guaranteed to lose all cooperation from the EU over border issues and reciprocal approvals. Our planes will be grounded and the lorry queues will be miles long, while the EU takes us to court for payment. Our reputation as a trustworthy trading partner will be in the bin before Fox signs a single deal.

That these lies are still peddled, at this late stage when we are all having to confront the reality of what is achievable, is utterly inexcusable.

If we choose to crash out with no deal and then refuse to pay this, we can be guaranteed to lose all cooperation from the EU over border issues and reciprocal approvals. Our planes will be grounded and the lorry queues will be miles long, while the EU takes us to court for payment. Our reputation as a trustworthy trading partner will be in the bin before Fox signs a single deal.

Deal or no deal? The Commons have no appetite for a no deal Brexit.
What do you mean our planes will be grounded? Lorry queues have already been miles long.
What court are they going to take us to?
We should not cave in to the bullies of Brussels. What would Churchill or Thatcher have made of it?

PS. As I can't take much more of this, it must be my punishment for not voting remain.

Scandalous lies this morning, from Dominic Raab, still peddling the Brexshitter myth that if we walk away from a deal we can avoid paying the £39bn we owe the EU. Anyone who has been party to the negotiations will be well aware that this sum is what the UK has committed to pay while it was a member and for the greater part of which we are legally liable.

If we choose to crash out with no deal and then refuse to pay this, we can be guaranteed to lose all cooperation from the EU over border issues and reciprocal approvals. Our planes will be grounded and the lorry queues will be miles long, while the EU takes us to court for payment. Our reputation as a trustworthy trading partner will be in the bin before Fox signs a single deal.

That these lies are still peddled, at this late stage when we are all having to confront the reality of what is achievable, is utterly inexcusable.

Am I alone in thinking that 39 billion eu is piffling and pathetic to be arguing over? As you said it was something the government entered into on all its citizens' behalf and to entertain defaulting demeans all of them if they accept it even as an option.

If we choose to crash out with no deal and then refuse to pay this, we can be guaranteed to lose all cooperation from the EU over border issues and reciprocal approvals. Our planes will be grounded and the lorry queues will be miles long, while the EU takes us to court for payment. Our reputation as a trustworthy trading partner will be in the bin before Fox signs a single deal.

Deal or no deal? The Commons have no appetite for a no deal Brexit.
What do you mean our planes will be grounded? Lorry queues have already been miles long.
What court are they going to take us to?
We should not cave in to the bullies of Brussels. What would Churchill or Thatcher have made of it?

PS. As I can't take much more of this, it must be my punishment for not voting remain.

Our planes will be grounded because the arrangement by which they can fly to EU countries is based on a pan-EU agreement that will, like two hundred odd others, LAPSE unless the EU reaches a new agreement with the UK. If we leave the EU with no deal we will have to start from scratch, setting up new ones. Which from their side they will be in no hurry to do, if we leave on bad terms, owing them £39bn. See?

We chose to leave. So all these deals, automatically, fall away. That is what the Brexshitters said they wanted, after all. Freedom from "the tentacles of Brussels". Remember?

It is not "bullying" for the EU to allow these deals to lapse. That is simply what happens by default, if we do not do another deal to replace them all.

Migrant workers in UK send home £8 billion a year to countries like Poland, Romania, Latvia (UN report).
This is to support their families. No doubt some of this also comes from benefits. The whole ethnicity of Britain is changing. Birmingham is a good case in point. What was once a city of immigrants from other parts of the British Isles is now a multicultural mix where most English people have had to move out. A hundred different languages spoken in some areas. Then I read that the bureaucrats of Brussels have forced another 10,000 asylum seekers on the city. Big headlines like this now appear in the local press. We are at the last chance saloon, but Birmingham (I was born in the middle) is gone as an English city. Much can be put down to the EU which we should never have joined in the first place. Some blame can be put on disgraced PM's like Wilson and Heath.

Migrant workers in UK send home £8 billion a year to countries like Poland, Romania, Latvia (UN report).
This is to support their families. No doubt some of this also comes from benefits. The whole ethnicity of Britain is changing. Birmingham is a good case in point. What was once a city of immigrants from other parts of the British Isles is now a multicultural mix where most English people have had to move out. A hundred different languages spoken in some areas. Then I read that the bureaucrats of Brussels have forced another 10,000 asylum seekers on the city. Big headlines like this now appear in the local press. We are at the last chance saloon, but Birmingham (I was born in the middle) is gone as an English city. Much can be put down to the EU which we should never have joined in the first place. Some blame can be put on disgraced PM's like Wilson and Heath.

So to summarise, "If I were you, I wouldn't start from here". Right? But we are here and it is now, unfortunately.

What you say is rubbish. EU migrants have not changed the culture of any of our cities. The people that have, in some locations, are immigrants from our former colonies: Pakistan, Africa, and so on. In future, thanks to Brexit, we will rely on immigration from the former colonies far more, to staff our NHS etc, instead of EU nationals who come from cultures similar to our own. So your doctors and nurses will be Pakistani rather than Spanish, for example. Far better, I'm sure you will agree.

It is simply lies that "bureaucrats from Brussels" force "asylum seekers" on us. We set our own policy for migration of people from outside the EU and always have done.

There are no asylum seekers from the EU, so what are you talking about. But I've known Somalis and others who are received into Holland or France then decide there are better benefits in Britain.
Take a village like Dunchurch. The residents are up in arms about plans to build 4000 new homes there. Nearby Rugby has a massive influx of eastern Europeans, so it seems the English have to move out.
They are building a new town near Stratford which eventually could house 40,000. This will destroy beautiful countryside. Stratford itself has doubled in size. There has to be a link to the high immigration.
Shakespeare country? Not any more.